Read a logcat stream

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With readOnlyHint already covering the safety profile, the description adds real behavioral context beyond annotations: per-call output capping, that unreturned data stays buffered for the next read, and that dropped bytes are reported on ring-buffer overflow. It stops short of covering error behavior (e.g., invalid or stopped stream) or whether the read blocks.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three tight sentences, each earning its place, with the core incremental-read semantics front-loaded ahead of the buffering and overflow caveats.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains return semantics (incremental buffer, cap, remainder carried over, dropped-byte reporting). Minor gaps remain around failure modes and blocking behavior, but nothing essential to calling it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented, including max_bytes' default of 65536 and stream_id's origin. The description's mention of a per-call cap reinforces max_bytes but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource ('Return buffered logcat output') and pins down the scope with 'accumulated since the previous read of this stream', which implicitly distinguishes it from logcat_snapshot and the start/stop stream siblings. It does not explicitly name the alternative tools, so an agent must infer the split.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied rather than stated: the phrase 'since the previous read of this stream' and the schema's 'stream_id returned by start_logcat_stream' tell the agent this is a follow-up to start_logcat_stream, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or contrast with logcat_snapshot.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.